Science Meets Religion

As mentioned on the main SMR website, the editor, in addition to being a researcher at a major scientific laboratory, is a member of the LDS faith. His fifth-generation ancestor was the second member of the LDS Church to be baptized in the British Isles in 1837. One interesting perspective brought to the science-religion . . . → Read More: Modern science and the LDS doctrine of natural law

Little is known about the great ancient mathematician Euclid. In a 5th century CE edition of Euclid’s Elements (the work that is the basis of geometry textbooks from ancient times to the present day), Proclus Lycaeus notes that when Ptolemy I (ruler of Egypt from 323 BCE – 283 BCE) grew frustrated at the degree of . . . → Read More: There is no royal road to geometry (or biology, geology or theology)

George Santayana’s quote (often misquoted and mis-ascribed) in the title of this post is as relevant today as when the great philosopher first wrote it more than a century ago.

In an illuminating and eloquently-written commentary in the Huffington Post, Southern Louisiana University Professor Matt Rossano highlights the folly of today’s anti-intellectual approach to religious faith [Rossano2010]: . . . → Read More: Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it

One of the issues most frequently raised by both creationist and and intelligent design writers is the question of gaps in the fossil record. These writers assert that there are large, significant gaps, and that in general the conventional scientific picture of a smooth sequence of species through the ages is a myth. It is not . . . → Read More: Scientists discover 2.1 billion-year-old pre-Cambrian fossils

Both creationist and intelligent design writers argue that science has yet to understand the origin of life, and that this is a fatal flaw in evolutionary theory [Behe1996; Dembski1998]. It is true that scientists don’t yet understand the origin of life, in particular the origin of the first self-replicating biomolecules. What’s more, unlike bony . . . → Read More: Scientists announce creation of synthetic bacteria

[This article has also been posted Here.]

A large fraction of the public still does not accept the most basic facts of modern geology, such as the notion that the earth is many millions of years old. For example, fully 45 percent of Americans insist that the earth was created at some time within the past . . . → Read More: How reliable are measurements of the age of the earth?

Most of us have watched at least one episode of the “Who Wants to be a Millionaire?” show. The rules of the show specify that the subject be allowed to take as much time as he/she wishes to ponder his answer, may consult one of his/her “lifelines” if desired, and may even think out loud . . . → Read More: Is That Your Final Answer? Creationism and Atheism Confront the End of Life

In one of the most dramatic fossil finds of recent decades, scientists have found partial skeletons of a boy and a woman, both in surprisingly good condition, that represent a new hominin species named Australopithecus sediba.

The specimens had relatively small teeth and a face like Homo, the genus that includes modern humans, but a brain size . . . → Read More: New Hominin Species Found in South Africa

Large numbers of the public (more than 40% of Americans, according to a recent poll) firmly subscribe to a creationist worldview — the earth is only a few thousand years old; fossils are the remnants of creatures that perished in Noah’s flood; and species (including humans) have not evolved significantly since their individual creation. Many . . . → Read More: Siberian DNA evidence suggests new hominin species

[Note: This appeared earlier on the Math Drudge blog, which is edited by David H. Bailey and Jonathan M. Borwein.]

Recently considerable attention has been drawn to the fact that some errors were found in the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, and the fact that, as revealed in a set of emails exchanged . . . → Read More: Creationism, Global Warming Denial and Scientific Integrity